INSTITUTE FOR CREATION RESEARCH

www.icr.org

M AY 2 0 1 3ACTS&FACTSV O L . 4 2 N O . 5

ARISE AND CALL HER

Blessed

! ould you like her days to be filled with praise? With so many voices competing for our attention, how can we maintain focus on God?

One way is to begin each day by immersing

ourselves for a few moments in a simple truth

from Scripture.

These brief inspirational readings are

full of biblical wisdom. Drinking in each gem

from Gods revelation will renew our minds

and spirits, and prepare us for a day filled with

gratitude and praise.

Hardcover (padded) w/ribbon $9.99

(plus shipping and handling)

To order, call 800.628.7640 or visit www.icr.org/store

"ays of #raise FOR WOMEN

Treat Her on Mothers Day with

C O N T E N T S

3M A Y 2 0 1 3 | A C T S & F A C T S

FEATURE5 Paradise Lost H E N R Y M . M O R R I S I I I , D . M I N .

RESEARCH9 How Similar Are Human and Ape Genes? J E F F R E Y T O M K I N S , P H . D .

APOLOGETICS10 New from Nothing: Is God Still Creating Today? J A M E S J . S . J O H N S O N , J . D . , T H . D .

IMPACT12 Paluxy River: The Tale of the Trails J O H N D . M O R R I S , P H . D .

BACK TO GENESIS 15 Slot Canyons, a Stunning Flood Formation J O H N D . M O R R I S , P H . D .

16 Paleontologys Pelvic Puzzle F R A N K S H E R W I N , M . A .

17 Is Mankind Getting Dumber? B R I A N T H O M A S , M . S .

18 Duane Gish: Celebrating a Creation Champion

CREATION Q & A20 What Are the Benefits of Spider Venom and Webs? F R A N K S H E R W I N , M . A .

STEWARDSHIP21 Arise and Call Her Blessed H E N R Y M . M O R R I S I V

VOLUME 42 NUMBER 5

MAY 2013

Published by

INSTITUTE FOR CREATION RESEARCH

P. O. Box 59029

Dallas, TX 75229

214.615.8300

www.icr.org

EXECUTIVE EDITOR

Jayme Durant

SENIOR EDITOR

Beth Mull

EDITORS

Christine Dao

Michael Stamp

DESIGNER

Dennis Davidson

No articles may be reprinted in whole or in

part without obtaining permission from ICR.

Copyright 2013

Institute for Creation Research

5

9

16

21

A C T S & F A C T S | M A Y 2 0 1 34

FROM THE ED ITOR

When you ask ICR President Dr. John Morris to describe his mother, Mary Louise Morris, he says, She prayed. Mary Louise was the wife of ICR founder Dr. Henry Morris, and the mother of ICRs current CEO, Dr. Henry Morris III. Two of her daughters

Mary Morris Smith and Rebecca Morris Barber also contribute

their time and unique talents to ICRs work. A third daughter, Dr.

Kathy Morris Bruce, serves Gods kingdom as a missionary.

Mary Louise invested herself in her husbands work and in

their family. She prayed extensively, John says. Dad started sev-

eral ministries. She sacrificed financiallyshe sacrificed in time,

and she supported him while raising his kids. He was in his world

of research and writing books, often traveling, and she encour-

aged him.

Rebecca echoes those thoughts. Mom revered her husband

and made sure that we did, too. She made it her mission to make

our home a pleasant and God-honoring place. Dad was often

gone or buried in his books, so she ran the house, but she always

made sure that he was seen as the leader. I dont remember argu-

ments or disagreements. If there were any, she never let on. We

knew that she was Dads number-one fan.

This devoted woman also stood by Dr. Morris as he dealt

with the backlash of challenging the disinformation entrenched

in conventional science. John remembers that Dad was teaching

at a university when he wrote The Genesis Flood, and he endured

all kinds of criticism for writing that booka book that changed

the world. She went through the heartbreak of watching him go

through some horrible things during that time, and she was his

support. She went through it with him. She gets the blessing.

Her ministry to us can be defined in the verse Greater love

hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends

[John 15:13]. She did that for Dad. She did that for us.

Mary Louises grandson Henry Morris IV shares similar

sentiments about his mother, Jan, in his stewardship article Arise

and Call Her Blessed (page 21). Mr. Morris says, Most of all, I am

thankful for her constant prayers throughout my life. He points

out the unmatched worth of such a godly woman, and shares a

snapshot of his experiences with his own faithful mother. He re-

minds us that mothers are identified as the single largest influ-

ence in teaching the Scriptures to their children, and he encour-

ages us to honor these precious women.

No doubt, ICR has been built and strengthened by the un-

compromising faith of men and women who love the Lordwho

had a vision and a passion to make a difference in the world and

who dedicated their lives to an unheralded ministry, beginning

with ICRs founder and his wife. Their sons, daughters, and grand-

children caught the vision for this ministry and continue to faith-

fully carry out the work.

Mary Louise Morris undergirded ICR during the early years

of establishing the ministry and through the following decades of

growth, changes, and difficulties. Like so many women who sup-

port and encourage their husbands in ministry, who dedicate their

lives to raising godly children and nurturing a family, Mary Louise

also did the work of another privileged ministrythat of quietly

communing with her heavenly Father and interceding on behalf

of those she loved.

She may have appeared to be in the background, but Mary

Louise was actually on the frontlines as a prayer warrior. Her hus-

band wrote books and articles and gave talks that impacted lives

worldwide. While she didnt write with ink on paper, Mary Louise

wrote with love on the hearts of her husband, children, and grand-

children, and through them, she continues to impact the world today.

Jayme DurantEXECUTIVE EDITOR

She Prayed

PARADISELostH E N R Y M . M O R R I S I I I , D . M I N .

5M A Y 2 0 1 3 | A C T S & F A C T S

So opens the epic poem Paradise Lost

by John Milton. Nearly all histori-

cal cultures have some mention of

a paradise that has been lost. The

Greek and Roman mythologies talk of a spe-

cial home of the gods, who lost their perfect

harmony through infighting that then result-

ed in ages of various efforts by the gods to re-

gain their statusoften consorting with and

manipulating humanity in the process.

The Bible is more succinct. Only two

chapters are given to describing what the Cre-

ator did and what He provided for the two

who were to subdue and have dominion

over all that had been created and made.2

In the second of those chapters, God reveals

through Adams own experience recorded in

Adams book3 the personal instruction and

specialized attention that the Creator Himself

granted to Adam. Unsaid, but surely implied,

is that God is making sure Adam cannot be

confused about the role he is to play.

Of Mans First Disobedience, and the FruitOf that Forbidden Tree, whose mortal tasteBrought Death into the World, and all our woe,With loss of Eden, till one greater ManRestore us, and regain the blissful Seat.1

A C T S & F A C T S | M A Y 2 0 1 36

Paradise

God plants a stunning garden, (we

would probably refer to this as an estate).

Though not recorded, it seems likely that

Adam watches the making. And as every

tree that is pleasant to the sight, and good for

food is caused to grow out of the ground of

the garden, Adam is thereobserving in real

time the power of the Creator and the good

of His omniscience and omnipotence.

Out of the ground the LORD God

formed every beast of the field, and ev-

ery fowl of the air, and then God Himself

brought them to Adam to let him expe-

rience these beautiful creatures personally

and give them names.4 This all took place

in the garden, in person, one-on-one with

the Creator!

Finally, the point the Cre-

ator wanted Adam to understand

came through. There was abso-

lutely nothing else in all of the cre-

ation like himthe first human.

As wonderful and beautiful as

these animals were, there was not

found any other creature that was suitable for

a life companion. Gods solution, of course,

was Eve.5

All of these personal events transpire on

Day Six of the creation week. Gods purpose

for the magnificent creatures who would bear

His image is recorded in Genesis 1. Adam, and

ultimately Eve, were in full possession of their

sinless humanity and the magnificent estate,

along with the operational guidelines to dress

it and to keep it.6 They were fully aware of the

Creators grace and bounty. Adam himself had

seen demonstrations of Gods omnipotence,

and both he and Eve had experienced some

time of one-on-one fellowship with the Lord.

Paradise was realunlimited opportunity was

theirs to gain; their only restriction was to re-

frain from eating the fruit of the tree of the

knowledge of good and evil.7

The Serpent

The whole focus of Scripture turns in

chapter three. History changed. The relation-

ship between God and man changed. Indeed,

the whole creation groaneth and travaileth

in pain together until now.8 The awful event

described in Genesis 3 has had Bible scholars,

scientists, theologians, philosophers, academi-

cians, and just about everyone else debating

for millennia. There is no question that Para-

dise was lost. No one contends that things

are anywhere near perfect or idyllic. But what

caused the loss?

Many would allegorize much of Gen-

esisespecially the first three chapters! But

the text is not presented as poetical or mysti-

cal. It reads just like what one would expect to

find in a historical record. Facts are recorded.

Sequence is logical. Names and places are iden-

tified. When Jesus was incarnated on earth, He

quoted from this narrative account. He pre-

sented it as real history. There are many other

passages in Scripture that refer to these events,

and all of them treat the text of Genesis as pre-

senting actual events. We who were not there

must embrace the consistency of message and

the necessary acceptance of that messageor

openly reject the account, the message, and the

consistency.

Strange, it seems, to encounter a ser-

pent (Hebrew naw-khawsh) who is so sub-

tle that his ready wit mesmerizes Eve and ap-

pears to leave Adam in silence. This is the same

Adam who held conversation with the Creator

not too long before. What is it about this naw-

khawsh that could so easily deceive Eve and

tempt Adam into full, conscious rebellion?

No backstory is given in Genesis. We

must either infer from the immediate text or

search the rest of Scripture for insight. And

the insight is chilling. That old serpent is

the title given to the devil himself in Revela-

tion 12:9 and 20:2. Some stunning personage

is described in Ezekiel 28:12-19 who appears

to be much more than an earthly king since

he was created and was in Eden the garden

of God covered with all manner of precious

stones, entitled the anointed cherub that cov-

ereth, and while on the mountain of God

was privileged to walk up and down in the

midst of the stones of fire. Whatever this

magnificent and powerful being was, he was

not a mere human.

Isaiah 14:12-14 tells of Lucifer (wheth-

er in prophetic hindsight or foresight) who

was cut down to the ground. This Light

Bearer thought himself to be so magnificent

that he assumed he could ascend into heaven,

exalt his throne above the stars of God, and

sit also upon the mount of the congregation

in the sides of the northfurther, he believed

himself to be so powerful that he could be like

the most High.

It is from these and other biblical in-

sights that we draw the conclusion that the

serpent in Genesis 3 is either the

devil incarnate or an animal pos-

sessed by none other than Lucifer

himself. Whether allegorist or lit-

eralist, theologian or philosopher,

the message is quite clear: Evil has

entered the paradise and, using

man as the pawn, that which per-

sonifies evil is attempting to thwart the eternal

plan of God.

Paradise Lost

The conversation between the serpent and Eve is the classic prototype of all tempta-tion, deception, and final disobedience. First, doubt is cast when the question is raised about the accuracy of what God has said (Genesis 3:1). Eves response is both incorrect and inter-pretive. She leaves out the sweeping generosity of the Creator by failing to acknowledge that He has given them permission to eat of every tree except this one (compare Genesis 2:16 and 3:2), and then adds a note of personal inter-pretation by claiming that they were forbidden even to touch the tree of the knowledge of good and evil (Genesis 3:3).

Immediately, the retort by the serpent was to brashly and boldly declare: Ye shall not surely die. Full in the face of the words of God flies this arrogant denial. If this statement is to be embraced, then God not only lied, but did so to cover up His inability to perform His oath. Either God is unable to execute judg-ment, or He is unwilling to execute judgment.

Nearly all historical cultures have some mention of a paradise that has been lost.

This masterstroke of manipulation requires a choice. One or the other is lying. There cannot be two opposite truths. Either Lucifer is right and God is wrong, or God is right and Lucifer is wrong. There cannot be another alternative.

Both Adam and Eve are silent. Eve is

slowly being led into deception. Adam is not.

But at this point, both should be shouting

defiance against the awful lie! Both should be

urgently calling for the Creator to rebuke the

daring usurper. But neither speak!

Now comes the coup de grce. Satan

defames the holiness of God and distorts

the unilateral love and limitless mercy of the

Creator by stating the great lie: God doth

know that in the day ye eat thereof, then

your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as

gods, knowing good and evil

(Genesis 3:5).

The smile of the devil

must have split the serpents

face in two (perhaps that is part

of the source of the vast maw

of the snake). He had won! Eve

rationalized through the decep-

tion, saw how good the food

was and how pleasant it looked. She began

to sense the power that she might have when

she became as gods, reached out, took the

fruit, ate it, and gave it to her husbandwho

was right there all along, and he did eat

(Genesis 3:6).

Judgment Rendered

Perhaps no other passage of Scripture has received such efforts to refute, to decon-struct, or to reverse the sentences pronounced by God on these participants than the specific focus of Gods judgment in Genesis 3.

Among herpetologists, there are those who specialize in the study of serpents. Many are qualified scientists who take a genuine interest in the academic discipline. Others, however, develop a macabre obsession with reptiles and have formed various clubs and societies to press for acceptance of these animalsin spite of the fact that the over-whelming majority of humanity revolts at the very sight of snakes. Why, one would ask, is there such a universal revulsion and fear of these creatures?

Perhaps we need not look any further

than Gods judgment on the snake (Genesis

3:14-15). Not only was its very shape changed,

but its habits and reputation were totally al-

tered so that humanity would never forget the

horrible event that took place in the garden.

The snake would forever be an enemy of man

and would forever remind us that God Him-

self would ultimately destroy its influence and

power among humanity.

Eve had enjoyed a co-regency with

Adam, but because of her duplicity and col-

laboration in the rebellion, she (and through

her all women) were placed under authority

and subjected to ongoing difficulties in the role

for which she was especially designed (Genesis

3:16). Various cries for equality, for example

from among some feminists, are actually pro-

testations against that judgment.

Societies that do not follow Gods design

suffer and ultimately fall. Marriages that are

not functioning around Gods protocols are

troubled, and many, many are destroyed. Men

and women who seek alternative lifestyles

are not at peacethey are angry, hostile, and

ostracized. The growing gay and lesbian move-

ments are essentially efforts to distort repro-

ductive design, created by God, and to blur

the distinctions that are so obviously built into

mankind. Gods laws can be broken and Gods

judgment resisted, but the consequences are

severe and the emotive results, bitter.

But the great enemy is death! Adams

horrible and willful rebellion brought into

Paradise the most awful of pronouncements.

The very ground would no longer respond

to mans oversight. Because of Adams rebel-

lion, the planet itself would rebel. All life would

return to dust. Living things would distort and

mutate. Every effort would be hard and labori-

ous and would ultimately end in death.

Every facet of fallen mankinds intelli-

gent endeavors attempts to thwart that judg-

ment! Humanity spends untold amounts of

priceless effort and money in an attempt to

delay that end. Most academic disciplines try

to define away the judgment and ignore the

message of redemption. Many theologians dis-

tort the words and twist the syntax in order to

gain some hybrid agreement that supports the

pagan or atheistic effort to make death nothing

more than a necessary part of creationsuch

as claiming that death is the natural means to

weed out the unfit or to work out the ulti-

mate plan of God.

But death is not good. Death is the

last enemy to be destroyed.9 Death is a judg-

mentit is the awful sentence handed down

by a thrice-holy God upon an openly rebel-

lious creature who had the au-

dacity to violate the very respon-

sibility for which he was created.

Death is the ultimate separation

from the Creator, designed by the

One who is Life to punish the an-

gelic beings who dared to lead the

rebellion.10

The Good News is that the

sentence has been served. The payment has

been made. Death can become Life! We who

are dead can be made alive by and through

the substitutionary death of Jesus Christ and

His victory over death in Jerusalem so many

years ago. Because of His victory, paradise has

been restored and awaits believers as a new

heaven and a new earth.11

Perhaps it is sufficient to quote the well-

known message in Johns gospel, chapter 3,

verse 16: For God so loved the world, that he

gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever

believeth in him should not perish, but have

everlasting life.

References1. Milton, J. 1674. Paradise Lost a Poem in Twelve Books; The

Second Edition; Revised and Augmented by the same author. London: Printed by S. Simmons next door To the Golden Lion in Aldersgate-street.

2. Genesis 1:272:3.3. Genesis 5:1.4. Genesis 2:8-19.5. Genesis 2:19-22.6. Genesis 2:15.7. Genesis 2:17.8. Romans 8:22.9. 1 Corinthians 15:26.10. Matthew 25:41.11. Revelation 21:1.

Dr. Morris is Chief Executive Officer of the Institute for Creation Research.

A C T S & F A C T S | M A Y 2 0 1 3 7M A Y 2 0 1 3 | A C T S & F A C T S

There was absolutely nothing else in all of the creation like himthe first human.

A C T S & F A C T S | M A Y 2 0 1 38

E V E N T S

Q MAY 3-4

Westby, WI

Living Waters Bible Camp

(F. Sherwin) 608.634.4373

Q MAY 7

Farmers Branch, TX

Metroplex Institute of Origin Science

Meeting

(J. Morris) 972.965.2110

Q MAY 10-11

Arlington, TX

Arlington Home School Book Fair

(J. Lisle) www.homeschoolbookfair.org

Q MAY 16-18

Nashville, TN

Teach Them Diligently Homeschool

Convention

(J. Lisle) 864.235.4444

Q MAY 20-23

Chicago, IL

Moody Pastors Conference 2013

(J. Lisle) 312.329.4407

Q MAY 22

Chicago, IL

The Moody Church Wednesday Prayer

Gathering

(J. Lisle) 312.329.4407

Q MAY 23

Carrollton, TX

Sandy Lake Amusement Parks 4th

Annual Home School Family Fun Day

972.242.7449

Q MAY 23-25

Kissimmee, FL

25th Annual FPEA Homeschool

Convention

877.275.3732

For more information on these events or to

schedule an event, please contact the ICR

Events Department at 800.337.0375 or

events@icr.org.

I C R M A Y E V E N T S

Dont miss ICRs seminar series, Your Ori-gins Matter, taught by Dr. Jason Lisle.

Join Dr. Lisle for insightful messages on:UYour Origins MatterUCreation: Science Confirms the BibleUAstronomy Reveals CreationUThe Ultimate Proof of CreationUEvolution and Logical Fallacies

Attendees to this seminar series will receive a free copy of Dr. Morris new book, The Book of Beginnings, Volume 2.

Dr. Lisle will also present Astronomy Re-veals Creation at The Moody Church on May 22, 2013. For more information or to register, visit www.pastorsconference.com or call 312.329.4407.

M O O D Y B I B L E I N S T I T U T E

PASTORS CONFERENCE

" ] " - U 9 q ]

www.pastorsconference.com

DR. JASON LISLE

In the past, evolutionists have tried to prove human evolution by comparing only similar DNA segments between humans and apesdisregarding the non-similar DNA regions.1 Many evolution-

ary studies have involved the selective use of

protein-coding segments in the genome called

genes. But comparing just the genes of hu-

mans and apes produces much higher DNA

similarities than many other regions of the ge-

nome would yield.

Surprisingly, a recent study compared

chimpanzee chromosomes to their similar hu-

man-counterpart chromosomes using highly

optimized DNA matching conditions and

found that the chimpanzee genome was only

70 percent similar to human overall.2 But what

about the protein-coding genes? In humans,

less than 3 percent of the genome is thought to

contain actual protein-coding sequence, while

the rest of the genome is involved in control-

ling how genes work and other aspects of chro-

mosome function.3

Of the genes that are found in both spe-

cies, evolutionists have only reported on the

sub-segments of the genes that are similar.

Because of these highly selective studies, we

really dont know how similar human genes

are to ape genes because non-similar data were

discarded. Therefore, an extensive study is in

progress at the Institute for Creation Research

to compare a wide variety of primate gene

data sets against a comprehensive database of

known human gene variants.

So how does a scientist extract only

the gene-based information from a genome?

When protein-coding genes are active, they

produce RNA copies of genes called transcripts

or messenger RNAs (mRNA) that are used by

the cell to make proteins. Using specialized

techniques, these mRNAs can be captured and

then sequenced. The mRNA sequences from

one organism can then be compared to that

of another to gauge how similar the genes are.

To create an exhaustive database of hu-

man genes, the DNA sequence of nearly nine

million different human mRNA variants were

downloaded from the National Center for

Biotechnology Information (NCBI) public

database. Even though the human genome is

thought to only contain about 22,000 genes,

many different gene variants can be produced

through a process called alternative splicing.4

After setting up the target human gene data-

base, query data sets containing the gene se-

quences from a diversity of primates were also

downloaded.

Although the study is just beginning, in-

teresting patterns are beginning to emerge that

challenge the standard evolutionary model

of human origins. First, it looks as though all

apes and monkeys contain significant portions

of their genes that are very similar to parts of

human genes. However, the primate genes also

contain significant sections that are specific to

their kind (e.g., chimp, gorilla, orangutan, etc.)

that are not found in human genes.

While we are early in the research the

similarity in the statistics and patterns observed

are not supportive of the standard Darwinian

evolutionary dogma. Instead, the mosaic-type

picture starting to emerge is that humans,

along with each type of primate, were uniquely

created after their kind. Because of similari-

ties in physiology and overall general anatomi-

cal features between humans and primates,

certain sections of programming code (DNA

sequence) have been repeateda logical pre-

diction for any type of engineered system. Stay

tuned as more details of the study will be re-

vealed in the next issues Research Column.

References 1. Tomkins, J. and J. Bergman. 2012. Genomic monkey busi-

nessestimates of nearly identical human-chimp DNA similarity re-evaluated using omitted data. Journal of Cre-ation. 26 (1): 94-100.

2. Tomkins, J. 2013. Comprehensive Analysis of Chimpanzee and Human Chromosomes Reveals Average DNA Similar-ity of 70%. Answers Research Journal. 6 (2013): 63-69.

3. Tomkins, J. 2012. Junk DNA Myth Continues Its De-mise. Acts & Facts. 41 (11): 11-13.

4. Tomkins, J. 2012. The Irreduc-ibly Complex Genome: Designed from the Beginning. Acts & Facts. 41 (3): 6.

Dr. Tomkins is Research Associate at the Institute for Creation Research and received his Ph.D. in Genetics from Clemson University.

9M A Y 2 0 1 3 | A C T S & F A C T S

R E S E A R C H

How Similar Are Human and Ape Genes? J E F F R E Y T O M K I N S , P H . D .

God has accomplished certain works of creation for every Chris-tian who is alive today. What are they? Part of answering that ques-tion involves answering this question: Is God

still creating? Although it may surprise many

Christians, the answer is yes.

Notwithstanding the First and Second

Laws of Thermodynamics, God is still creat-

ingas a biblical word study of create will

demonstrate.1

But didnt God rest from His creation

work on Day Seven?2 The correct answer

would be yes, but only regarding three of

Gods creation works, two of which directly

impact our lives as human beings. Which

works are these that, in combination, define

each one of us who is a Christian?

To appreciate the specific ex nihilo cre-

ation works3 God has done for every believer

in Jesus Christ, it is necessary to review the

usage of the verb create in both the Old and

New Testaments. (This review only concerns

humans, so Gods creation of nephesh-life for

animals in Genesis 1:21 will not be analyzed

in this article.) An exhaustive review of the

relevant verses reveals four specific creation

works that together define the created life of

each Christian living today:

1) Physical stuff, the material from which our

physical bodies are ultimately derived;

2) Biogenetic humanity from Adam, who was

uniquely created in Gods image;

3) The individual soul-and-spirit personality

that God created, one at a time, for each of

the descendants of Adam and Eve; and

4) The regenerated life that God has created in

each person who believes in Jesus Christ as

his or her personal Savior.

Only the first three of these apply to all

humans now living; all four apply to all Chris-

tians alive today.

Before reviewing those four catego-

ries of Gods creation work, however, one

clarification needs to be made: Despite what

some influential academics (beginning with

the theistic evolutionists of the 1800s) have

been teaching since Darwins generation,

the Bible does not teach that humans de-

scended from subhuman primates that were

magically transformed into people with

amnesia of their former animal life.4

Gods creation works that contribute to the definition of who we are as Christians

Genesis 1:1 reports Gods first act of cre-

ation (and the first usage of the Hebrew verb

for created, bara), commanding physical

stuff to come into existence out of nothing.

Because God did not recycle or repackage pre-

existing stuff, the matter-energy He created

(bara) really was ex nihilo, something new

commanded to come into being.

Genesis 1:20-21 reports how God created

the first animal life on earth, specifically great

whales, as well as other sea creatures and fly-

ing animals. A form of the Hebrew word bara

is used in this verse, indicating that something

new from nothing was commanded by God

to existin this case, conscious animal life.

It is significant that the word create (He-brew bara) is applied to the introduction of animal life, but not to plant life. Plants are highly complex replicating chemical systems, as are animals, with reproduc-tive programs based in the remarkable DNA molecule in both cases. However,

A C T S & F A C T S | M A Y 2 0 1 310

New from Nothing: Is God Still Creating Today?

A P O L O G E T I C S J A M E S J . S . J O H N S O N , J . D . , T H . D .

11M A Y 2 0 1 3 | A C T S & F A C T SA C T S & F A C T S | M A Y 2 0 1 3

animals possess another entitythat of consciousnesswhich plants do not possess, and this required a second act of true creation (the first was in Genesis 1:1, the creation of the basic space/mass/time universe). Such consciousness is the essential meaning of the Hebrew word nephesh, commonly translated soul, but in Genesis 1:20 (its first occurrence) translated life, and then in Genesis 1:21 living creature. In Genesis 2:7, refer-ring to man, it is rendered living soul. Thus, both men and animals possess the specially-created nephesh.5

Thus, some of what God created on Day

One is what we are now made ofphysical

matter-energy, amazingly arranged in atoms

and molecules that ultimately comprise our

material bodies. But the next part of our hu-

man lives was not created until Day Six, when

God commanded into existence something

absolutely new from nothing, a kind of life that

carried Gods own imagea spiritual life that

no animal has ever been given.

Man was not only to have a body (of the created earth) and a consciousness (of the created soul), but man was also to

possess a third created entity, the image of God, an eternal spirit capable of com-munion and fellowship with his Creator.6

Those two works of Gods creating, di-

rectly necessary for human life, occurred and

were finished during the creation week. God is

no longer doing the kind of creating that He

did on Days One, Five, and Six.

Thus, God is sustaining the physical

cosmos, including earth and all of its physi-

cal inhabitants, according to the First and Sec-

ond Laws of Thermodynamics (Colossians

1:16-17). God is not creating any new physical

stuff, though He is providentially using innu-

merable physical processes, some rich in intri-

cate biochemical details, to recycle and retask

pre-existing matter-energy according to His

will.7, 8, 9

However, Psalm 102:18 informs us

surprisingly, to somethat there is still some-

thing being created.

This shall be written for the generation to come: and the people which shall be cre-ated shall praise the LORD.

This verse indicates that God has been

creating humans for millennia since Eden,

and there are many more humans who shall

be created for Gods glory!

Although our procreated physical bod-

ies are meticulously and carefully woven8

from pre-existing genetic information, bio-

chemically written on and housed9 within

biochemical materials, the non-material part

of each one of ussoul, spirit, personality (or

whatever terms are proper for describing the

non-physical part of every person)was spe-

cially created by God.

Accordingly, God commanded each of

us, one at a time, to come into personal ex-

istence as a new individual human, brought

forth out of nothing pre-existing, when God

chose to do so.10 This is a new from nothing

creation work that is still being done by God,

daily, all around the world. But another kind

of creation work is also ongoing every day

around the world.

God providescreatesregenerated

spiritual lives in all who accept redemption as

believers in His Son:

When a person receives the Lord Jesus Christ by faith as his Creator and Savior, he does indeed become a new creation (II Corinthians 5:17), and the miracle of regeneration is always recognized in Scripture as an instantaneous event ac-complished by the Creator in the mind and heart of the believer at the time of conversion.11

What a wonderful Creator we have! He

is worthy to receive glory and honor and

power (Revelation 4:11), for He is the tran-

scendent yet providentially caring Creator of

allpast, present, and future. What a privilege

it is to belong to Him!

References1. The English Bibles verb create translates both the Old

Testament Hebrew verb bara and the New Testament Greek verb ktiz. This article is the result of a biblical con-cordance word study using Young, R. 1984. Youngs Ana-lytical Concordance to the Bible. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishing, 210.

2. Genesis 2:2 qualifies which specific work God rested from doing.

3. For centuries, theologians have used the Latin phrase ex nihilo (out of nothing) to refer to the fact that God cre-ated everything out of nothing. Try to appreciate the power of God, who commands that which is not to exist, and it does! The word create should be recognized as properly referring only to what is completely new from nothing, in contrast to pre-existing material things that God recycles, repairs or repackages, such as making Adams physical body from the dust of the ground (Genesis 2:7).

4. Dr. William Dembski has proposed that hominid animals were morphed into Adam and Eve and then specially blessed by a miraculous amnesia of their evolutionary an-cestry. See his quoted statements in Johnson, J. J. S. 2011. Culpable Passivity: The Failure of Going with the Flow. Acts & Facts. 40 (7): 8-10.

5. See Morris, H. M. 2006. New Defenders Study Bible. Nash-ville, TN: World Publishing, 12, Genesis 1:21 editorial foot-note.

6. Ibid, Genesis 1:26 editorial footnote.7. See Job 3839. For example, Job 38:35 indicates that God

uses lightning for specific tasks.8. See Psalm 139:15, analyzed in Johnson, J. J. S. 2012. Biblical

Truth in High Definition. Acts & Facts. 41 (8): 8-10.9. As the pre-Viking Era classic Beowulf illustrates when

it uses the colorful Anglo-Saxon term banhus (bone-house) for denoting a humans physical frame, earth-bound humans are housed in flesh, bone, and blood. See Cooper, W. R. 1995. After the Flood. Chichester, UK: New Wine Press, 150. Regarding how God biochemically writes the programs for our bodies growth and develop-ment, see Johnson, J. J. S. 2011. DNA and RNA: Providen-tial Coding to Revere God. Acts & Facts. 40 (3): 8-9.

10. This was completely Gods choicewe could have been made grackles. See Johnson, J. J. S. 2012. Of Grackles and Gratitude. Acts & Facts. 41 (7): 8-10.

11. Morris, H. M. A Created People. Days of Praise, September 18, 2009.

Dr. Johnson is Associate Professor of Apologetics and Chief Academic Officer at the Institute for Creation Research.

God commanded into existence something absolutely new from nothing, a kind of life that carried Gods own imagea spiritual life that no animal has ever been given.

J A M E S J . S . J O H N S O N , J . D . , T H . D .

A C T S & F A C T S | M A Y 2 0 1 312

I M PA C T

Paluxy River: The Tale of the Trails

J O H N D . M O R R I S , P H . D .

djlig

htfo

ot.b

logs

pot.c

om

In the early days of the modern creation science movement, a favorite

recent-creation argument involved dinosaur and human tracks re-

portedly found together along the Paluxy River near Glen Rose, Texas.

The dinosaur tracks were clear, and the others were more similar to

human footprints than any other known source. Certainly such a dis-

covery would deal a blow to the evolutionary story, in which dinosaurs are

13M A Y 2 0 1 3 | A C T S & F A C T SA C T S & F A C T S | M A Y 2 0 1 3

thought to have gone extinct some 65 million years ago while humans

evolved more recently. As two leading anti-creation advocates wrote:

Such an occurrence, if verified, would seriously disrupt convention-al interpretations of biological and geological history and would support the doctrines of creationism and catastrophism.1

News of the footprint discovery first came out with the publication

of the 1961 classic creation book The Genesis Flood, complete with clear

photographs.2 Dr. Clifford Burdick had initially researched the Paluxy

find, and soon others came to help, most particularly Stan Taylor, direc-

tor of Films for Christ. Over the next few years, Stan excavated many

tracks and trails of both dinosaur and human-like prints, carefully docu-

menting the discoveries on film to eliminate any charge of fraud. Both

my father, Henry M. Morris, Ph.D., and I became nominally involved

as the film Footprints in Stone was being finalized in 1973.3 The movie,

suitable for showing in churches and schools, convinced many that evo-

lution was indeed a false premise.

In 1975 and afterward, I was able to continue the research while on

the faculty of nearby Oklahoma University, resulting in the 1980 book

Tracking Those Incredible Dinosaurs (and the People Who Knew Them).4

This book contained many detailed photographs and maps and a sound

geological interpretation. It was not only accepted by Christians, it infu-

riated evolutionists.

Geologic Setting

The Glen Rose Limestone, in which the prints rest, is several hun-

dred feet thick and covers much of the southeastern North American

continent. Conventionally dated as Early Cretaceous (supposedly around

100 million years old, nearing the end of the age of the dinosaurs), it

not only contains abundant dinosaur prints, but is often recognized in

drill cuttings by a plethora of carbonized wood chips throughout its

composition. The Cretaceous is near the middle of the Geologic Col-

umn, and resting below the Glen Rose Limestone are many thousands of

feet of sedimentary rock from an earlier time.

Creationists interpret the sedimentary strata as having mostly been

deposited by the great Flood of Noahs day. In general, the deeper stra-

ta are from early in the Flood, the middle layers from the height of the

Flood, and the upper strata from its waning stages. Surficial layers often

date from the post-Flood Ice Age. Thus, the Glen Rose Limestone dates

from several months after the beginning of the Flood. By this time, the

floodwaters had already fully transgressed the continents, washed over

them, and then returned several times, depositing and eroding with un-

imaginable fury.5 Evidently some hearty, water-resistant dinosaurs had

survived until this point and were able to leave their prints as fresh mud

was sporadically exposed. Conversely, it is difficult to imagine how hu-

mans could have survived this long while the Flood was in its most active

stages, transgressing and regressing.

The water depth ran rather shallow when the lime mud was de-

posited, and the flood-toppled trees sometimes scraped bottom, leaving

branches and bits of wood behind. Samples of the wood have been car-

bon dated. Of course, carbon dating could never support the standard

evolutionary date of 100 million years. Radioactive carbon decays too

rapidly to ever intimate even 100,000 years. Instead, the dating of Glen

Rose wood specimens yields an apparent age of only a few thousand

years, a date compatible with biblical chronology.4

Project History

Examining the vast variety of individual prints at the Paluxy site

impresses one that they were not made at a quiescent time when perfect

prints would be expected. Water flowed rapidly in a high-energy envi-

ronment. Animals were probably exhausted as they fought vainly for

their lives. Soon all land-dwellers not on the Ark would die, but when the

Glen Rose sediments were deposited and soft, apparently some were still

alive. The Institute for Creation Research team of researchers scoured the

river for miles up and downstream for more tracks. Numerous dinosaur

prints and trackways were found and studied. An array of shapes could

be seen, even in the same trail. The human-like shapes seldom showed

all the features of a human foot. The general shape was only interpreted Photo 1: The main case for human tracks was made at the Taylor site, where the long Taylor Trail (over 20 impressions, bottom to top) and two other trails intersected a long trail of deep dinosaur tracks (lower left to middle right). Even though the trails appeared to contain im-perfect human tracks, some in each trail transformed over the next decade into clear dinosaur prints.

Photo 2: A human-like track found in association with other solitary tracks, but not in a recognizable trail. Within one year of discovery, all prints at this site had completely eroded.

A C T S & F A C T S | M A Y 2 0 1 314

as possibly human because researchers knew of no other creature that

could make such a shape.

The presence of a trail of prints, with regular stride, an appropriate

stride length, and a common ratio between length and width, carried

greater weight than a better individual print displaying all the poten-

tial features. Trails of multiple human-like prints often crossed or over-

lapped trails of clear dinosaur prints. At the time of the publication of my

book in 1980, the other researchers and I felt comfortable in interpreting

them as possible human tracks.

In 1982, the American Humanist Association commissioned four

well-known anti-creationists to frequent the Paluxy in an endeavor to

refute my book. Meanwhile, I continued to do research. Through their

efforts and my own research, it became obvious there was a problem, and

in 1984 I concluded we had most likely made an error. It was erroneous

to claim the human-like prints were probably human.

The change in our evaluation was prompted by a change in the

tracks themselves, occurring several years after the prints had first been

discovered. Many of the human-like prints developed ghost overprints

surrounding the elongated foot shapes. While the human-foot shape re-

mained indented, it was enveloped by a striking three-toed dinosaurian

shape with a distinctive rust color, different from the gray limestone.6 The

coloration was typically not indented, and indeed could not be felt. Fur-

thermore, colored dinosaur-print shapes appeared in areas where there

were no prior print impressions. Our chemical analysis confirmed that

the colored areas contained more iron inside than outside, and we could

find no evidence that any foreign chemical had been added. Evidently,

the new prints were real. The colorations were hardly visible, if at all, in

earlier days, and we had mistakenly interpreted the vaguely human-like

shapes as being of human origin.

ICR responded with integrity and pulled my book off the mar-

ket, as did Films for Christ with their documentary film. The tracks in

question were more likely poorly formed dinosaur tracks, random ero-

sion marks, or deliberate alterations to the original tracks. We looked

diligently for evidence of foul play, but as yet no direct evidence of evo-

lutionary fraud has been uncovered. Christians respect the truth, and

the truth is, the tracks are too ambiguous to make a clear determina-

tion. ICR holds rigorously to the view that dinosaurs lived at the same

time as man, but feels that the Paluxy may not provide useful evidence

for this. Others hold different views, and ICR encourages them to con-

tinue searching for evidence that could convince a skeptic. Meanwhile,

we continue to study.

Current Status

Now, nearly all the prints have eroded and are gone. The state of

Texas founded Dinosaur Valley State Park, but maintains access to very

few dinosaur prints, disappointing many visitors. Meanwhile, the city of

Glen Rose has grown and only with a personal guide can the remaining

sites be found.

A clear understanding of how the prints formed and became al-

tered has as of yet evaded this researcher, and it remains a grand mys-

tery. But the story isnt over. A recent re-evaluation of a classic dinosaur

print site in Australia presents evidence and an interpretation remark-

ably similar to that required by the Paluxy River data.7,8 This investigation

suggests that the sediment was laid down by rapidly flowing water, and

that the trackways generally follow the water-flow direction. Water depth

varied greatly. Sometimes the dinosaurs were wading in shallow water,

while sometimes they were swimming with the current, occasionally

touching bottom. The trackways often appear and disappear, indicating

that sometimes the dinosaurs were completely carried along by the water.

Often the prints are deep, while in other cases they are shallowall very

similar to those at Paluxy.

Most remarkable are elongated human-like shapes in the center

of three-toed prints, indicating the presence of a central pad that left a

mark under rare conditions. Could a similar rare set of circumstances be

responsible for the human-like shape within so many of the large dino-

saur prints at Paluxy?

We may never know. Just as the Paluxy prints are irreversibly erod-

ing, revealing more or less information as they disappear, so the prints in

Australia are fading. Sometimes truth is stranger than fiction. Meanwhile,

my evaluation of the Paluxy footprints remains the same. They are too

ambiguous to be used as an anti-evolution argument, but they just might

be coming into their own as good evidence for Flood catastrophism.

References

1. Milne, D. H. and S. D. Schafersman. 1983. Dinosaur Tracts, Erosion Marks and Midnight Chisel Work (But No Human Footprints) in the Cretaceous Limestone of the Paluxy River Bed, Texas. Journal of Geological Education. 31 (2): 111-123.

2. Whitcomb, J. C. and H. M. Morris. 1961. The Genesis Flood. Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian & Reformed Publishing Co., 167, 174.

3. Taylor, S. E. 1973. Footprints in Stone. (Film.) Produced by Films for Christ, Inc.4. Morris, J. D. 1980. Tracking Those Incredible Dinosaurs. San Diego, CA: Creation-Life Publish-

ers.5. See Morris, J. 2012. The Global Flood: Unlocking Earths Geologic History. Dallas, TX: Institute

for Creation Research; and Morris, J. and J. J. S. Johnson. 2012. The Draining Floodwaters: Geologic Evidence Reflects the Genesis Text. Acts & Facts. 41 (1): 12-13.

6. Morris, J. D. 1986. The Paluxy River Mystery. Acts & Facts. 15 (1). 7. Romilio, A., R. T. Tucker, and S. W. Salisbury. 2013. Reevaluation of

the Lark Quarry dinosaur tracksite (late AlbianCenomanian Win-ton Formation, central-western Queensland, Australia): no longer a stampede? Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology. 33 (1): 102-120.

8. Thomas, B. New Dinosaur Tracks Study Suggests Cataclysm. Creation Science Update. Posted on www.icr.org January 25, 2013, accessed March 1, 2013.

Dr. Morris is President of the Institute for Creation Research.

I M PA C T

Photos 3 and 4: Over time, many of the imperfect but elongated hu-man-like tracks developed a surrounding discoloration in the clear shape of a dinosaur track. Similar discoloration prints appeared where no indentation had been before. No indication of fraud was discerned.

15M A Y 2 0 1 3 | A C T S & F A C T S

B A C K T O G E N E S I S

W eve all seen photos of those exquisitely beautiful and mysterious canyons with swirling, multicolored sand-stone layers that look almost like marble cake. Known as slot canyons (their depth is much greater than their narrow width), most usually have a sometimes dry streambed flowing through them. What formed these remark-ably sculptured beauties?

These inspiring canyons are exotic and often remote. The state of Utah sports a con-centration of them. Over the years, Native Americans have attached spiritual significance to these treasures. Many of the stirring photos weve seen were taken from helicopters or by daredevils on hang gliders, darting in and out among the rocks. Those fortunate enough to have visited these hard-to-access canyons and the contorted sandstone beds they display so valued their experience they returned with their own lasting memories on film.

The geologic deposits that host such variegated canyons are called cross-bedded sandstones, and the two most common are the Navajo and Coconino Sandstones. Geologists recognize that these types of rocks were once soft sand layers now hardened into stonesandstone. Uniformitarian thinking ascribes such deposits to wind blowing desert sand into great sand dune fields. Most creation-Flood thinkers attribute those rocks and their shapes to giant underwater sand waves gener-ated by the great Flood of Noahs day.

Amateur Flood advocates might see the swirling strata and conclude that the Flood was exceptionally turbulent here, wrinkling originally flat-lying layers like taffy in a mix-ing bowl, but the truthwhile no less cata-strophiclies elsewhere.

Lets start by considering the original deposition of the sandwas it made with wind or with water? A dominant current di-

rection (of either wind or water) is required to produce the parallel dunes in the field. We know from experiments that the slip faces of the dunes, which collect the sand on the back side, rest at a steeper angle when dry than wet. The angles at which the sandstone cross-beds lie match the underwater angle. Also, the small reptile and amphibian footprints found on many of the faces couldnt be left on dry sand. The average sand grain-size within the sandstones is relatively large, requiring rapid flow. The dunes are high, so high they must have been deposited at great depth. The evi-dence better fits deposition by water than by dry desert winds. But if so, a storm of great intensityfar more intense than any storm ever witnessedcaused the required water movements. The fierce Flood comes to mind.

Consider that a sand dune grows as long as there is a continual supply of sand being carried along by a directional current. Deep, fast-flowing water deposits sand grains on the down-current face, which is then cov-ered by the next increment of sandand the next, and the next. Soon, an angular stack of rather thin parallel beds accumulates. The field of underwater dunes is more like a series of multi-leveled ripples. The irregular rock-carving erosion that followed, after the vast dune-strewn land rose above sea level, cre-ated the swirling appearance of todays slot canyons. Uneven erosion of the uneven and sloping stacks of layers produced the stun-ning effect.

The great Flood of Noahs day was a time of unequaled death and judgment on the sinful people of the day. We marvel as we study the worldwide extent of its dynamic geologi-cal effects. Yet we can also thrill as we see the beauty left in its wake. How marvelous the original beauty of creation must have been for its destruction to be so awe-inspiring.

Dr. Morris is President of the Institute for Creation Research.

J O H N D . M O R R I S , P H . D .

Slot Canyons, a Stunning Flood Formation

Not only was your pelvis designed to provide a lap for spreading a napkin or holding your chil-dren or grandchildren, it was also designed by the Creator as an elegant

mechanism to attach your legs to your torso.

Evolutionists insist that our pelvic girdle

(composed of the pubis, ilium, and ischium)

evolved from a fish-like ancestor millions of

years ago. But thats just one of the many un-

scientific just so stories of evolutionism. How

did a lobe-finned fishwith no pelvis what-

soevermanage to evolve into an amphib-

ian with a complete pelvic girdle? The more

evolutionists investigate this strange scenario,

the more puzzling it seems and the less likely

it occurred.

The relationship of limbed vertebrates (tetrapods) to lobe-finned fish (sarcop-terygians) is well established, but the origin of major tetrapod features has remained obscure for lack of fossils that document the sequence of evolutionary changes.1

While non-Darwinists would challenge

this supposed well established link, they

would heartily concur that an evolutionary

origin of major tetrapod features [e.g., the

pelvis] has remained obscure.

Secular paleontology texts show the

pelvic girdle, fully composed of the three

aforementioned bones, appearing suddenly

in early tetrapods. According to evolutionists

like award-winning vertebrate paleontologists

Jennifer Clack and Per Ahlberg, the earliest

known pelvic-girdle elements appeared in the

tetrapod Elginerpeton.2 But this single fossil is

troublesome, according to authors of a secu-

lar paleontology website: The postcranial skeleton is much harder to piece together, as it comes to us in frag-ments.[Ahlbergs] reconstruction of almost the entire pelvic girdle from a little nubbin of broken bone is like watching a magician pull a living [ancient amphib-ian] out of a hat. One is tempted to gasp

and applaud, even when he explains, very clearly, just how the trick is done. Its [sic] an incredible performance.3

Consider further the dismal history of

pelvic evolution research. In evolutionist Bar-

bara Stahls 1974 book Vertebrate History, Fig-

ure 6.2 supposedly depicts the relationship

of the pelvic girdle to the vertebral column in

fish and early tetrapods. The relationship was

nothing of the sort! In the diagram, the fin of

the fish is loosely embedded in the muscula-

ture of the ventral body wall, while the un-

identified tetrapod has a complete pelvic girdle

with a sacroiliac articulation [connection] to

the spinal column.4

Interestingly, evolutionist Michael Ben-

ton shows the same illustration in his 2005

paleontology text.5 So, between 1974 and 2005

there were no compelling discoveries regard-

ing the supposed transition from the loose pel-

vic fins of fish to the sophisticated pelvic girdle

of land animals.

A 2009 comparative vertebrate anatomy

text shows a summary of pelvic girdle evo-

lution starting with sarcopterygians (lobe-

finned fish, including the living fossil coel-

acanth) with no pelvic girdle.6 The very next

illustration shows an early tetrapod com-

plete with pubis, ilium, and ischium. There is

no transition between the two, either in the

diagrams or the fossil record. Creationists are

hardly surprised because macroevolution is

falsefish never learned to walk.

Indeed, in 2012 Jennifer Clack discusses

the pelvic fin skeleton of a fossil fish called

Panderichthys, saying it shows no especially

tetrapod-like features. But she still considers

it part of the mysterious evolutionary progres-

sion from a fishlike to a tetrapod-like state.

The next fossil she lists after Panderichthys is

Acanthostega, with a fully formed pelvis. She

suggests the transition between them was rap-

id, but there are more or less no clues to the

intermediate forms.7

No clues? Creationists have a better ex-

planation that just happens to piece the puz-

zling fossil facts together: God created fish as

fish and tetrapods as tetrapods.

References1. Daeschler, E. B., N. H. Shubin, and F. A. Jenkins, Jr. 2006. A

Devonian tetrapod-like fish and the evolution of the tetra-pod body plan. Nature. 440 (7085): 757-763.

2. Clack, J. 2012. Gaining Ground, 2nd ed. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 433.

3. Elginerpeton: Getting Off on the Wrong Foot. Palaeos: The Vertebrates; Sarcopterygii: Elginerpeton. Posted on palaeos.com, accessed March 1, 2013.

4. Stahl, B. J. 1974. Vertebrate History: Problems in Evolution. New York: McGraw-Hill, 202.

5. Figure 4.2, where Benton references Stahl. Benton, M. J. 2005. Vertebrate Paleontology, 3rd ed. Malden, MA: Black-well Science Ltd. (Blackwell Publishing), 77.

6. Kardong, K. V. 2009. Vertebrates: Comparative Anatomy, Function, Evolution, 5th ed. New York: McGrawHill Higher Education, 335.

7. Clack, 217.

Mr. Sherwin is Research Associ-ate, Senior Lecturer, and Science Writer at the Institute for Creation Research

A C T S & F A C T S | M A Y 2 0 1 316

Paleontologys Pelvic Puzzle

B A C K T O G E N E S I S

F R A N K S H E R W I N , M . A .

Dumber?

17M A Y 2 0 1 3 | A C T S & F A C T SA C T S & F A C T S | M A Y 2 0 1 3

B A C K T O G E N E S I S

Do todays children have lower I.Q.s than yesterdays? Yes, ac-cording to measurements of intellectual and emotional strength gathered from different countries and

contexts. The results show the same basic de-

cline and resist the notion that public or other

forms of education are to blame. Could the

cause instead lie within?

Stanford University professor Gerald

Crabtree thinks so. He published a pair of es-

says in the journal Trends in Genetics, citing

new discoveries that show why the human

intellect is surprisingly fragile.1 This biblical-

creation-friendly notion didnt sit well with

the authors of a rebuttal paper, who countered

that the human intellect is robust.2 What lies

at the heart of this disagreementbad science

or bad assumptions?

Crabtree identified two fundamental

processes as the main culprits. First, human

intelligence uses neurons, and these cells can

only function properly if their genes stay in top

shape. Second, these genes are susceptible to

degradation. This loss of organization occurs

continually as mutations slowly, irreversibly

garble genes, and the resulting errors pile up

and are not corrected.

Our brains use 2,000 to 5,000 so-called

Intellectual Deficiency (ID) genes, according

to Crabtrees estimate. Geneticists routinely

identify specific mutations in ID genes as the

causes of various types of mental retardation

and similar intellectual syndromes that arise

during imperfections in brain development.3

Proper human intelligence requires at least

one clean copy of every ID gene.4 Like a miss-

ing wooden slat in a very long rope bridge, a

mutant ID gene challenges the brain to care-

fully step over the gap on its way to develop-

ing the biological infrastructure for healthy

intelligence.

Each new generation accrues about 60

new mutations to the gene-coding DNA re-

gions of the human genome. Crabtree applied

this rate to calculate that every 20-50 genera-

tions we should sustain a mutation in one copy

of one of our many ID genes. As a result, in

the past 3000 years then (~120 generations),

each of us should have accumulated at the very

least 2.5-6 mutations in ID genes. According-

ly, the human intellect perhaps reached a peak

2000-6000 years ago.1

This appears to confirm three lessons

that can be drawn from the Bible. First, Adam

and Eves brains were originally very good.

Second, we had our best brains about 6,000

years ago. Third, humanity has suffered genetic

degradation since then under the Curse.5,6

Some who wish to reject Scripture work

hard to find ways to excuse Bible-confirming

data from their own field of genetics. The

authors of the technical rebuttal argued that

Crabtree overestimated the true number of ID

genes, but they did not offer data supporting

an alternative number, nor did they explain

why fewer ID genes should cancel Crabtrees

conclusion. The rebuttal team also rejected

the idea that ID genes are susceptible to mu-

tational buildup on the basis of genetic theo-

ries regarding the evolutionary dynamics of

deleterious mutations and on the results of

a computer model that illustrated how genes

can increase in number assuming hypothetical

evolution-friendly parameters.2

Both Crabtree and his detractors tried

to extrapolate some set of numbers to make

conclusions about the unobservable past. The

rebuttal authors who resist the genetic-decay

principle hand-picked numbers that support

evolutionary history. Crabtree instead used

numbers collected from real-world studies.

And those studies present an ever-clearer case

for a human race that was very good at the

start, but is steadily falling apart. References1. Crabtree, G. R. 2013. Our Fragile Intellect. Part I. Trends in

Genetics. 29 (1): 1-3. 2. Kalinka, A. T., I. Kelava, and E. Lewitus. 2013. Our Robust

Intellect. Trends in Genetics. 29 (3): 125-127.3. One example is mental retardation caused by mutations in

Aristalessrelated, homeobox protein, expressed in devel-oping nervous tissue. See Strmme, P. et al. 2002. Mutations in the human ortholog of Aristaless cause X-linked mental retardation and epilepsy. Nature Genetics. 30 (4): 441-445.

4. Generally, each parent supplies one copy of each gene, total-ing two copies for each person. Brain cells that inherit one clean and one mutant copy of an ID gene often access the clean copy and sequester the mutated copy.

5. Tomkins, J. Genetics Research Confirms Biblical Timeline. Cre-ation Science Update. Posted on icr.org January 9, 2013, accessed Feb-ruary 28, 2013.

6. Thomas, B. 2012. Human Muta-tion Clock Confirms Creation. Acts & Facts. 41 (11): 17.

Mr. Thomas is Science Writer at the Institute for Creation Research.

B R I A N T H O M A S , M . S .

IS MANKIND GETTING

A C T S & F A C T S | M A Y 2 0 1 318

DUANE GISH:CELEBRATING A CREATION CHAMPION

The creation science movement has lost a stalwart champion. Dr. Duane Gish, longtime defender of creation truth, went home to be with his Savior on March 6, 2013. A memo-

rial service was held for Dr. Gish on April 6 at

Shadow Mountain Community Church in El

Cajon, CA.

Over the course of a very full life, Dr.

Gish traveled hundreds of thousands of miles

and impacted countless people as he debat-

ed the evolutionists of his day and spoke in

churches, schools, and elsewhere, sharing the

scientific evidence supporting the accuracy

and authority of Gods Word. For many, Dr.

Gishs talks were their first introduction to the

fact that the Bible can be trusted in all mat-

tersin science as well as theology. Many of

todays creation scientists can trace the begin-

nings of their work back to his ministry and

influence.

Born in Kansas and educated at Uni-

versity of California, Los Angeles, Dr. Gish

received his Ph.D. at UC Berkeley. Soon after

the 1961 publication of The Genesis Flood, he

joined with other creation-minded scientists

to found the Creation Research Society in

1963 and served on their governing board un-

til 1997. After a fruitful career in biochemistry

at the Upjohn Company in Michigan, Dr. Gish

joined Dr. Henry Morris at the newly formed

Institute for Creation Research in 1970.

At the time, there were no

such ministries and no clear path

to follow. Dr. Gish shouldered the daunting

burden of speaking to any audience about the

evidence for creation. He especially found his

own ministry niche on the college campus,

where evolution was thoroughly entrenched.

His expertise equipped him to speak on origin

of life topics in presentations that were en-

riched by his personal laboratory experiences.

He had worked and published with recog-

nized experts in the field, and his voluminous

knowledge of the subject served him well.

In those early days, evolutionists were

caught somewhat by surprise when a qualified

speakercomplete with a working knowledge

of the relevant literature and researchchal-

lenged their worldview. Soon the lectures

turned into debate opportunities, and Dr.

Gish rose to the occasion. Over the years, he

participated in over 300 formal debates, and by

all accounts he won them all. Soon spokesper-

sons for evolution publicly recommended that

evolutionists not debate Duane Gish, because

they would surely lose. He never enjoyed the

confrontations, but he relished the chance to

present creations evidences.

The debates and campus lectures were

always billed as a scientificnot religious

comparison of the evidence for and against

evolution. His opponents many times tried

to discredit him as a scientist by branding

him as a Bible-believer. He never denied his

Christianity, but scrupulously stuck to the

scientific evidence, never bringing up the

Bible. In the process of presenting truth un-

apologetically, however, he gave a good tes-

timony. Josh McDowell claimed ICRs work

was the cutting edge of evangelism. Chris-

tian campus groups reported a great harvest

of souls following the debates.

Dr. Gishs lectures most often began

with an explanation of the nature of science

and how any discussion of origins involved

speculation about the unobserved past. He

would then present a study of the record of

life in the past as seen in the fossil record.

He concluded with the laws of science, say-

ing they precluded any self-transformation

of organisms from simple to more complex

forms. Depending on the time and inter-

est, Dr. Gish would follow the lecture with

sections on origin of life experiments or

dinosaurs. He particularly shone during

question and answer sessions because his

encyclopedic knowledge and winsome

way often won over the most aloof

audience and sometimes even dis-

Over the years, he participated

in over 300 formal debates, and

by all accounts he won them all.

19M A Y 2 0 1 3 | A C T S & F A C T SA C T S & F A C T S | M A Y 2 0 1 3

It is often difficult for we who remain behind to adequately ac-knowledge the impact a persons life has had on us. Those of us who knew Dr. Gish could relate many personal stories and, quite probably, tell some of his jokes that made us all laugh. He was a delight to know.

Most readers of Acts & Facts are acquainted with Dr. Gishs profes-

sional reputation. His long career with ICR left a trail of defeated debate

opponents, as well as articles and books that have taught and encouraged

many. He will be missed.

But perhaps some insight from inside the Morris family might be

appropriate.

From their earliest association, Drs. Morris and Gish became

friends. It seemed unusual to the family. Duane was feisty, boisterous,

and a flurry of energy. Dad was quiet, unassuming, and content to be in

the background. Yet the two of them clicked in a wonderful way, chal-

lenging and stimulating each other as perhaps no other combination

could have done. God surely put the two of them together.

Dr. Gish is often referred to as creations bulldog. And indeed he

was, biting and barkingand chewing up the opponents who would

dare to defy the evidence. Dr. Morris was the consummate coach, always

thrilled at the action on the field, yet going over the plays on Monday

morning, looking for ways to increase the margin of victory. The two

of them certainly demonstrated the reality of the saying the whole is

greater than the sum of its parts.

Mary Louise (Dads loving wife) and Lolly Gish were active togeth-

er in Christian Heritage College and, of course, in ICR. Their friendship

grew deep and they shared many hours of prayer for their husbands and

the ministry. When Lolly became ill, Duane became her caregiver with

a tenderness that showed a side to him that was not visible to many of

us. Much can be learned about a mans character by the way he treats his

wife.

Later, when the first Lolly went home to be with the Lord, Duane

married the second Lollythe beautiful and gracious widow of Rich-

ard Bliss, another ICR scientist. Dr. Bliss and his wife had been close

friends with the Gishes. Once again, the Lord seemed to have been setting

the stage behind the scenes for a continuation of mission and ministry.

One final and personal note: When the ICR board asked me to

assume the role of CEO, Dr. Gish frequently called to encourage and as-

sure me that things were all right and would prosper in the years ahead.

Thanks, Duane, for your leadership, friendship, and life well-lived.

Henry M. Morris III

armed his most avid opponents.

The subject of fossils proved his most valuable anti-evolution subject,

and before long his debate lecture developed into a book, Evolution? The Fos-

sils Say NO! Years later, after many printings, the book was updated and reis-

sued as Evolution? The Fossils Still Say NO! This was a strong foundation on

which the rest of creation thinking was built. He also authored other books,

including A Creation Scientist Answers His Critics, Evidence Against Evolution,

Dinosaurs: Those Terrible Lizards, and Dinosaurs by Design.

Even though evolutionists frequently mocked him openly, censured

him, and tried to silence him, Dr. Gish always comported himself as a Chris-

tian gentleman. Sprinkling in good humor, he had a habit of winning the

hearts of those in the audience. His arguments were logical, his documenta-

tion relevant, and his case more believable than that of his opponents, but

it was perhaps his personal presentation that carried the day. In short, the

audiences liked him. Through it all, creationism grew into a movement that

has impact to this day.

The entire creation ministryespecially his ICR familywill miss

Dr. Gish. He leaves a wife, Lolly, four children by his deceased first wife (also

named Lolly), nine grandchildren, three great-grandchildren, and hun-

dreds of thousands of intellectual children who are advocates of biblical

and scientific creation. He was not a large man, but stood as a giant in de-

fense of scriptural authority. Well done, thou good and faithful servant

(Matthew 25:21).

Dr. Harold Slusher, Dr. Henry Morris, Dr. Duane Gish, and Dr. John Morris

Dr. Duane Gish, Dr. Henry Morris, Pastor Chuck Smith, and Dr. Tim LaHaye

A C T S & F A C T S | M A Y 2 0 1 320

At any given time, no

matter where we are,

were not far from those

infamous arachnids the

spiders, most of which are not a threat.1

Many feel a natural revulsion when they

experience spiders up-close-and-personal, but

like the mosquito,2 God had a plan for them in

our ecosystem. What is immediately apparent

is that spiders have always been spiders and did

not evolve from a non-spider ancestor. Indeed,

even fossil spiders are 100 percent spider.

Tufts of hairlike fibers seen on its legs showed this 165-million-year-old arach-nid to be the oldest known species of the largest web-weaving spiders alive todaythe golden orb-weavers, or Nephila.3

Going back even further in evolution-

ary time reveals two fossil spiders of the genus

Eocteniza and Protocteniza from Coseley, Eng-

land. They were found in sedimentary rock

dated at 310 million years agoyet, as the

creation model predicts, theyre still spiders.4

While creationists ponder the purpose

of some aspects of spider physiology prior

to the Fall, its now evident that their toxicity

actually has the potential to save many people

from starvation.

As the worlds population continues to

grow at approximately 80 million souls per

year, its important to make maximum use of

the various food crops. Unfortunately, crops

lost to insect pests is around 10 percentfood

that could have nourished millions of people.5

Reducing this intolerable loss via tradi-

tional pesticides is costly, it adversely

affects the environment,

and insects are becoming

increasingly resistant to the poison.

(Insect resistance to pes-

ticides is hardly evidence of evolution.6 The

insects are the same genus and species before

and after resistance acquisition.) One way of

battling crop-destroying insects is to use more

environmentally friendly compounds that are

just as deadly to these pests. Nicotine is one

such natural pesticide. It can be diluted and ap-

plied and has a much lower acute mammalian

toxicity and greater field persistence.7

Oddly enough, using spider venom as

a natural insecticide may be another method.

Research biologists suggest using a peptide (a

compound of two or more amino acids) iso-

lated from spider venom that is poisonous to

insects. This chemical is called insecticidal

spider-venom peptide, or ISVP. Consider

the benefits man has discovered from spider

venom: A large number of SS-rich insecticidal peptides have been isolated from spider venoms. Many of these have desirable properties for development as bioinsecti-cides, including high potency, rapid speed of kill, lack of vertebrate toxicity, low pro-duction costs, and activity against a wide range of crop pests and disease vectors.8

In regard to webs before the Fall, they

could very well have been made as decora-

tions, as some species do even today. Evolu-

tionists state, Exactly why the spiders adorn

their webs is unclear.A team has made a

discovery in one spider species that suggests

the spiders use adornments tactically to make

their webs more visible to animals that might

accidentally damage them.9 One thing is cer-

tainthe webs before the Fall must have been

large, spectacular, and beautiful. Indeed, spider

silk has been found to conduct light almost as

well as glass fiber, opening the door to biosen-

sor, laser, and microchip research.10

But what was the purpose and function

of spider venom before the Fall, when every-

thing was very good? Creationist scientists

continue to research and answers are becom-

ing apparentso stay tuned.

References1. Isbister, G. K. and H. W. Fan. 2011. Spider bite. Lancet. 378

(9808): 2039-2047.2. Sherwin, F. 2013. Gods Amazing Invertebrates: The Miss-

ing Links Are Still Missing. Acts & Facts. 42 (2): 12-15. See also Sherwin, F. 2013. Mosquitoes and the Fall. Acts & Facts. 42 (3): 9.

3. Choi, C. Q. Largest Fossil Spider Found in Volcanic Ash. LiveScience. Posted on livescience.com April 19, 2011.

4. Ibid.5. Oerke, E. C. 2006. Crop losses to pests. Journal of Agricul-

tural Science. 144 (1): 31-43.6. Swift, D. 2002. Evolution Under the Microscope. Alloa, UK:

Leighton Academic Press, 235-244. 7. Insecticide. Wikipedia. Posted on wikipedia.org, accessed

March 18, 2013. 8. King, G. F. and M. C. Hardy. 2013. Spider-venom peptides:

structure, pharmacology, and potential for control of insect pests. Annual Review of Entomology. 58 (January): 475-496.

9. Gill, V. Spiders protect webs with decorations. BBC Nature News. Posted on bbc.co.uk May 25, 2011, accessed March 18, 2013.

10. Stark, A. Eco-friendly Optics: Spider Silks Hidden Talents Brought to Light for Applications in Biosensors, Lasers, Microchips. The Optical Society. Posted on osa.org October 11, 2012, accessed March 18, 2013.

Mr. Sherwin is Research Associate, Senior Lecturer, and Science Writer at the Institute for Creation Research.

C R E AT I O N Q & A

What Are the Benefits of Spider Venom and Webs?

F R A N K S H E R W I N , M . A .

Children who are taught the Bible from the very beginning have a marvelous advantage. Stud-ies have consistently shown an overwhelming majority of genuinely Chris-

tian adults accepted Christ during childhood.

And mothers are identified as the single larg-

est influence in teaching the Scriptures to their

children.

Such was the case with young Timothy.

Long before the apostle Paul led him to a sav-

ing knowledge of Christ, Timothy had from

a childknown the holy scriptures, which are

able to make thee wise unto salvation through

faith which is in Christ Jesus (2 Timothy

3:15). This knowledge came from the teach-

ings of two godly women, and Paul would

later call to remembrance the unfeigned

faith that is in thee, which dwelt first in thy

grandmother Lois, and thy mother Eunice. (2

Timothy 1:5).

The love of a good mother is invaluable

in the life of a child. But that value is exponen-

tially far greater when the mother is also a fol-

lower of Christ. A godly father or grandfather

may well exert great influence for good in a

childs life, but a godly motherone who loves

the Lord, studies the Scriptures, and teaches

them to her childrenhas a value far above

rubies (Proverbs 31:10).

I am blessed to have such a mother. Some

of my earliest memories are of my mother Jan

Morris teaching Bible stories in Sunday school

from an old flannelboard she held in her lap.

And during my boyhood years she encouraged

me to memorize Scripture, often testing me

as I practiced my verses to earn merit badges

for Boys Brigade and Awana. Most of all, I am

thankful for her constant prayers through-

out my life. My mother is the most fearsome

prayer warrior I have ever known, and much

of my spiritual growth is due to her faithful in-

tercession for me. A good mothers love for her

children never fadesbut in my experience,

the prayers of a godly mother, along with her

love, always increase with the passage of time.

The fifth of Gods great Ten Command-

ments requires children to honor their par-

ents (Exodus 20:12), and it is significant this

is the only one that carries a special promise.

Centuries later, Paul would later confirm and

even strengthen this commandment when he

wrote, Honour thy father and mother; which

is the first commandment with promise; That

it may be well with thee, and thou mayest live

long on the earth (Ephesians 6:2-3). God con-

siders this to be of such importance that long

and productive lives are promised to those

children who obey.

Through the years, ICR has been blessed

to receive many gifts made in honor or in

memory of loved ones. But the number of

gifts made in honor of Mom far outweighs

them all! If you are looking for a unique way

to honor your mother, please consider a gift

to ICR that will recognize her godly influence

on your life. In exchange, it is ICRs sincere

privilege to send special letters of thanks and

recognition to all family and friends you so

designate. ICR will provide you with a copy

of all letters prepared on your behalf, along

with our thanks and a tax-deductible receipt

for your gift.

Every godly parent is worthy of honor

by their childrenevery day, not just once

a yearand especially those godly mothers

who taught us the ways of God. Such mothers

will indeed have occasion to rejoice in time

to come as her children

arise up, and call her blessed

(Proverbs 31:25, 28).

Mr. Morris is Director of Donor Re-lations at the Insti tute for Creation Research.

P R AY E R F U L LY CONSIDER

SUPPORTING ICR

(GALATIANS 6:9- 10)

ThroughQOnline DonationsQIRAs, Stocks, and SecuritiesQMatching Gift ProgramsQCFC (federal/military workers)QGift Planning U >>Livi U 7 U /

Visit icr.org/give and explore how you can support the vital work of ICR ministries. Or con-tact us at stewardship@icr.org or 800.337.0375 for personal assistance.

ICR is a recognized 501(c )(3) nonprofit ministry, and all gifts are tax-deductible to the fullest extent allowed by law.

H E N R Y M . M O R R I S I V

21M A Y 2 0 1 3 | A C T S & F A C T S

S T E W A R D S H I P

ARISE AND CALL HER

Blessed

Goodbye, Duane Gish. Please send my condo-

lences to the Gish family. He has touched many

lives, including mine. Every creationist alive to-

day stands tall on top of the shoulders of Dr.

Gish.He took bullets in the chest and arrows

in the backwhile many of us were just figur-

ing out the basics. Duanewe will miss you

and look forward to meeting you in person

in glory!

D.C.

[Jason Lisles web news ar-

ticle Washing Machines on

Mars is] too good. [It] fits

evolutionists and ETs like a

glovethey need to wear

it. This has got to be one of

the best news articles this year. I loved it. Bril-

liantly witty with just the right amount of wry.

Jason Lisle gets the well-done award in cre-

ation journalism.

R.S.

I just wanted to say thanks for your com-

munication of the truth as it pertains to His

creation. This [seminar] was a great intro-

duction to the subjects presented. Our people

have been buzzing about the various topics. I

have overheard many of them discussing the

presentations amongst themselves. This is ex-

cellent! The people have been equipped with

information to defend their faith, and given

a desire to learn more. Your ministry is a very

important organization that more churches

should partner with. We were very pleased

with the outcome of the seminars and hope to

do it again sometime in the near future. Thank

you for your professionalism and for your ex-

egetical and scientific concern for the truth!

K.W.

The Wonder of His

Love by Dr. Henry

Morris III (in the

February 2013 Acts

& Facts) is such an

aid in my prayers. He became sin for us

(2 Corinthians 5:21) is a picture [I use] as I

pray. I pray for the light of the Holy Spirit to

penetrate the leadership of our country, for

without that light, we cannot understand truth

and righteousness. The natural man receiveth

not the things of the Spirit (1 Corinthians

2:14). We appreciate you who spend your life

for His glory.

M.A

I recently started

receiving your Days

of Praise devotional

and Acts & Facts

magazine. I was go-

ing to write to ask you to save the postage be-

cause I can read these online, but decided I will

pass the magazine along to others for their ed-

ucation. I have been enjoying the information

you post on your website. It has been an amaz-

ing experience to learn how science can be

used to prove Gods existence and how secular

scientists dont believe the facts. Thank you for

your ministry. It was an interesting experience

stumbling upon your office in Dallas recent-

ly while I was there for training. While driving,

I took a wrong turn and just happened to catch

a glimpse of the sign in front of the building.

I turned around, went in, and talked to the

receptionist, who provided me with some in-

formation. I hope when I am there again I can

visit to learn more about your ministry. Thank

you again for your work.

K.B.

This morning I read your commentary on He-

brews 12:3 and caught your phrase very few

show by their lives that our witness and min-

istry have been